• HaiZhung@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 minutes ago

    I get the sentiment, who doesn’t want to dunk on Google?

    But the headline is needlessly inflammatory. There is no law yet; and google essentially is saying please please don’t implement it, it totally doesn’t make sense.

    Don’t get me wrong, the EU should still implement it. And once it is law; Google will also comply.

  • MaxPow3r11@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Damn.

    Wish the rest of us could just ignore all laws & not face any consequences.

    What a fucking joke this entire system is.

  • timestatic@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Fine the heck out of them then. If they don’t pay the fine ban em. Plenty of alternatives out there. More competition in the search engine market would be better anyways.

    Not too big of a fan of banning companies as the hurdles should be decently high… Especially if many people rely on their service but if they won’t comply with our jurisdiction long term I see this as the only option as fees can not be order of business to pay

  • DukeHawthorne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I want to live in a world where the EU bans Google, but we all know the EU will just roll over and accept this.

  • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Didn’t a year ago or so, Some European lawmaker made a vague hint in support of something that involved regulations on social media, and Elon replied “go fuck yourself” verbatem?

    Play hardball, or surrender and give them what they want. there’s no compromise or middle ground with these techbro fascists

  • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    This is definitely to avoid the ire of fuhrer trump. It’s also coincidence that meta is abandoning fact checking right before the new administration

    He will sic the dogs of regulation on them if they don’t dance to his tune

  • xenomor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Given that we are going full authoritarian fascist now, perhaps the EU should ban Google, given the US tik tok precedent.

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      5 hours ago

      What a twist. In the 90s, the internet forced countries to wake up to the new modern era. It was a combination of American companies wanting both to expand and provide goodwill.

      And now, this new era is going to tell American companies to fuck off.

      • Toribor@corndog.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Democracies around the world rightly shouldn’t tolerate the blatant corruption and manipulative business practice of American tech companies.

        • ne0n@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          31 minutes ago

          America itself seems fine with it.

          Oh wait, you said Democracies right. My bad.

  • Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I like this. I don’t think I need a large company fact-checking anything tbh. They already got too much influence and power, I don’t need them to control the narrative even more.

  • rob200@endlesstalk.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Can’t believe Google’s doing this, they seemed to be the most dedicated to this of the big companies. Especially on Youtube.

    • SoftTeeth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      The rich are trying to pivot the Trump vicory into world domination before we can organize and dethrone the oligarchy.

      Google/Meta helping to spread misinformation is a big part of that.

      I wish I was kidding.

      Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives

      • Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 minutes ago

        The evidence so far is that the primary response of the heinously rich when they fear for their lives is to spend more or much more on their security and their politicians rather than to change their evil greedy behavior at all. Those looking for any real solution to oligarchs need to consider this fact when evaluating what should be done.

        • Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 minutes ago

          Honestly, the most humane and least distasteful solution is to dispossess the billionaires of their billions. Not a drop of their blood need to be shed, should this be done.

  • Foni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    213
    ·
    14 hours ago

    In other words, a company, acting on behalf of its own shareholders, tells a government, which represents 100% of the citizens in a given territory, to shove its legislation where the sun doesn’t shine. And not only is this not inherently absurd, but it also stands a significant chance of succeeding in getting the government to comply.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      13 hours ago

      A government … only in theory does. Like a church represents God, because humans are too dumb to understand him directly.

      “Fact-checking” is preserving a certain model of censorship and propaganda. “No fact-checking” is moving to a new model of censorship and propaganda.

      Both sides of this fight prefer it being called such, so that one seems against misinformation, and the other seems against censorship, but they are not really different in this dimension. They are different in strategy and structure and interests, but neither is good for the average person.